TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Abiogeneralization Archive

View 0 posts and 180 comments by Abiogeneralization on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

I’ve seen people get sad for all sorts of reasons. That doesn’t mean I want to regulate sadness using government violence. That’s insane. What percent of people in the US die to murder? More specific than that, what percent of people in the US die to domestic violence? You are talking about a tiny problem that the media makes seem like a huge problem. And what, you want to flood the courts with cheating cases? Normally, this is a lame question but I think it really applies in this case: Who hurt…
/r/MensRights24/04/25 01:47 PM
0

What percent of cheating situations result in violence? Drinking leads to violence. How did prohibition work out? This isn’t Minority Report where we prosecute people before the crime even happens. Why do you feel the need to control every little thing? Did you get cheated on and now you need an emotional outlet? Don’t take that out on the rest of us.
/r/MensRights24/04/25 01:35 PM
1

We prosecute violence. Cheating is not violence. Controlling people using police is violence.
/r/MensRights24/04/25 01:30 PM
0

That’s so weird and controlling. What percent of people die to murder? What percent of cheating situations result in murder? You’re talking about controlling all human relationships with violence over a tiny problem.
/r/MensRights24/04/25 01:24 PM
0

The fuck are you even talking about? That would be like punishing people for their friendships dissolving. Stay out of people’s personal relationships. Focus on yourself.
/r/MensRights24/04/25 01:20 PM
1

That CEO will live in fear of the blood on his or her hands.
/r/MensRights19/12/24 02:09 AM
1

Evil is as evil does.
/r/MensRights19/12/24 02:03 AM
0

Evil people should live in fear.
/r/MensRights18/12/24 03:43 PM
0

What will? Voting? Haha.
/r/MensRights18/12/24 03:42 PM
1

How much evil would justify being shot by a citizen?
/r/MensRights18/12/24 03:04 PM
1

Bingo. Money is also only as valuable as we make it. There are no real downsides to legal abortion.
/r/MensRights25/10/24 02:08 AM
0

Life isn’t a “right.” Life is real. It started on Earth about 3.7 billion years ago. Rights are not real. They’re something we made up.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 09:09 PM
3

Because life is bad enough with the number of shitty kids we currently have to deal with. It would be worse if abortion were illegal.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 11:09 AM
-4

Neither is life. Rights aren’t real.
/r/MensRights24/10/24 11:07 AM
5

Internalized misandry and a love of censorship.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/24 10:56 AM
2

I’m not into this story. One, this was a misunderstanding of an idiom that doesn’t really mean “human rights.” It means a meta video game build. Two, I am not into censorship. I don’t like the double standard where it’s unacceptable to make any negative comment about women’s bodies, but I don’t want to fight censorship with censorship. Human bodies are weird and diverse. Why wouldn’t we talk about them both positively and negatively?
/r/MensRights23/02/22 12:43 PM
3

Yeah, I don’t mind taking a supply/demand approach to dating or taking biology into account. That’s fine. And I’m not into censorship. What I mind is double-standards about it.
/r/MensRights30/11/21 11:14 PM
2

Wow, your mom must really hate polar bears.
/r/MensRights26/11/21 01:50 PM
1

More like misandrist self-hatred.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/21 09:01 PM
1

r/menslib
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/21 07:22 PM
1

And the religious answer is what? Also, I’m sure you don’t have think science had a better answer to ethics than religion at any time. I do, because it’s right now, but I’m sure you don’t. You believe that ethics are determined by Jesus’s father. Between biology and history, we have a pretty good secular understanding as to how and why humans create laws. Do you not understand why animals would be altruistic? Do you not understand evolutionary psychology?
/r/MensRights17/11/21 02:32 AM
1

Of course science was invented by religious people. They tended be killed otherwise. The fact that scientists are willing to change their minds is evidence that they do not take things on faith. Maybe there was something “before” the universe and time as we currently experience it? I have no reason to believe that ancient dessert dwellers of the Levant had any insight into what that was. I have no reason to believe it was supernatural forces at all. Paraphrasing someone else—“I challenge you to …
/r/MensRights16/11/21 04:41 PM
1

Religions claim to know how the universe was created, specifically by supernatural forces AKA magic. Religion does not claim that it came from a vague “something.” Each religion claims it came from a very specific supernatural force. In Christianity, that force is called Yahweh/Jehovah/Capital-G God. He’s the same mythical character that sent his son Jesus to Earth to die for the sins of that creation. That’s not just “something.” It has a name and a backstory. Eighth grade science doesn’t reall…
/r/MensRights16/11/21 04:37 PM
1

Things aren’t “magic” just because we don’t understand them completely right now. “Magic” involves supernatural forces by definition. My current hypothesis is that the universe exploded outwards about 14 billion years ago due to natural forces. You believe it was created by supernatural forces. That’s the difference.
/r/MensRights16/11/21 04:24 PM
1

Why are your beliefs not relevant when I’m asking you about your beliefs? Deism was not invented from a blank slate: by people who were unsatisfied that humans do not know everything. It was invented by cutting out parts of theism that are far too silly to believe in the modern era. If deism makes sense, why aren’t you a deist?
/r/MensRights16/11/21 04:24 PM
1

Yeah it sounds like you personally believe in magic, probably since childhood. It’s understandable; lots of people do. Jordan Peterson does as well. You can tell how it seeps into his thinking about everything else: that little dash of megalomania. I get why theists argue in favor of deism—because theism is completely stupid while deism is only pretty stupid. But it’s not genuine, because you don’t even buy into deism yourself. So why would I? Do you understand what I mean when I say “deism” and…
/r/MensRights16/11/21 04:03 PM
0

Is that a yes?
/r/MensRights16/11/21 03:55 PM
0

Well yeah: that’s my point. Superstition is superstition. So am I correct in my assumption that you personally believe that this one specific deity of the ancient Mediterranean sent his son to earth to die for the sins of his original creation? If so, why were you arguing in favor of deism?
/r/MensRights16/11/21 03:52 PM
1

So because we haven’t finished working on particle colliders, that means that this one particular deity of the ancient Mediterranean literally exists? Deism didn’t come from atheists who were unsatisfied that we don’t understand the universe perfectly. It came from theists who realized that huge swaths of their mythologies were silly. Are you personally a deist, or are you personally a theist? If you’re a theist, why are you arguing in favor of deism?
/r/MensRights16/11/21 03:04 PM
0

It’s not that hard to understand why magical thinking exists even though magic does not.
/r/MensRights16/11/21 02:39 PM
1

He’s a deist with Christian leanings at the very least. That’s still magical thinking.
/r/MensRights15/11/21 02:14 PM
1

He doesn’t have to label himself as any particular denomination to still believe in magic. He does. If you listen to him talk about how he views the universe, it’s clear he holds certain superstitions. He’s a strong deist at the very least, bordering on Christian theist. What do you mean by, “Even if he were, also no?”
/r/MensRights15/11/21 02:49 AM
1

He needs to stop believing in magic.
/r/MensRights14/11/21 12:03 AM
2

That he’s too obsessed with superstition and literary archetypes. He’s delusional.
/r/MensRights13/11/21 12:48 PM
1

Oh man, jurors are not that sympathetic. They’re barely willing to compensate physical pain and suffering, let alone psychiatric appointments. Also, does it really sound like OP needs drugs? I don’t see any mention of lost wages in the post.
/r/MensRights03/08/21 11:43 AM
1

I do. And a lot of them lose or don’t recoup their legal fees.
/r/MensRights02/08/21 11:15 PM
-1

Juries are not as into pain and suffering as they appear on television. I don’t think they would award an uninjured man who was harassed for perhaps half an hour a six figure settlement.
/r/MensRights02/08/21 11:14 PM
-1

In dollars, what damages did OP suffer? I’m not saying what happened was good or just. But too many people commenting on this post don’t understand legal damages. If OP had been injured, then a civil case would be pretty cut and dry. But since he wasn’t, it would be a really difficult civil liberties case to go through.
/r/MensRights02/08/21 10:17 PM
4

What are his damages?
/r/MensRights02/08/21 08:26 PM
1

Because they can - that’s how the marketplace works. At least until they’re 30.
/r/PussyPassDenied25/03/21 08:56 PM
3

Intersectional
/r/AntiFeminists10/03/21 01:09 PM
3

There’s no such thing as “Whataboutism” when you’re discussing sexism. Every sexist stereotype has an equal and opposite stereotype in the other gender. Society doesn’t think men are predatory because elephants are nurturing. Society doesn’t think women are incapable because turtles are ambitious and powerful. Anyone who complains about making a comparison between the genders when you’re talking about gender issues does not understand the big picture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/02/21 12:48 PM
-9

Not as long as some beards do. “Men kill people.” The fact that not all men kill people doesn’t mean that “Men don’t kill people” is a true statement. Men do kill people. (Not trying to be misandrist. You could use the word “women” instead. The sentence was just awkward with “people” twice.)
/r/MensRights06/02/21 04:06 PM
-5

Dwight Kurt Schrute III
/r/MensRights06/02/21 03:42 PM
-6

If some beards do, then the statement “beards do,” is true.
/r/MensRights06/02/21 03:31 PM
-1

The environment is collapsing around us every day because there are nearly 8 billion humans on the planet, but not having enough children is a problem? Come on.
/r/MensRights05/02/21 04:15 PM
4

It takes 24 people never driving a car their entire life to make up for just the CO2 emissions caused by having 1 child. It takes 74 lifelong vegans. We basically shut down the whole planet this year, and it resulted in a 7% reduction in emissions. All of that is just emissions, never mind all the other ways our massive hoard destroys the environment. We won’t solve environmental destruction or the energy crisis with this many humans on the planet. And since humans are far too stupid and selfish…
/r/PussyPassDenied18/12/20 08:18 PM
11

I want polar bears to stick around.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/12/20 04:57 PM
17

“Irredeemably” is the key word. It’s clear from the rhetoric going around these days that people think it’s a genetic failing. It’s Melanin theory.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/09/20 01:16 PM
13

The message is good. The surveys and their quantifications are worthless.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/09/20 07:49 PM
15

He’s not allowed to touch her because he is 1. male and 2. white. Though he wouldn’t really be able to defend himself if he were black either. Since he’s white, he’d risk being fired and socially ostracized as a horrible racist. If he were black, the cops would come and hurt him. The difference in how police treat men and women is WAY more severe than how they treat white and black people. White men have worse police interactions than black women.
/r/PussyPass06/08/20 08:00 PM
2

You’re now banned from r/MensLib for daring to compare things that are comparable.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/07/20 01:45 PM
4

Sexual dimorphism. It was always going to turn out this way. There are examples of more egalitarian tribes in pockets of rainforests, but there are also examples of panda bears in places where they have no real predators. What if one of the men wanted to take care of the tribe’s babies instead of fight enemy tribesmen? Doesn’t matter - there’s no such thing as baby formula and we need every able-bodied warrior available. Now that we have technology, we can do what we want instead.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/20 08:42 PM
3

If you Google, “Sentencing by race and gender,” you end up with dozens of studies confirming this for various court systems. Here’s an example: https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=scjpeerpubs
/r/PussyPass07/05/20 12:03 PM
47

White men receive harsher sentences than black women for the same crimes. Our court system is certainly racist; it’s even more misandrist.
/r/PussyPass06/05/20 09:28 PM
1

I meant more along the lines of how congratulatory it would have been - it would have focused on how wonderful women are for doing this, which is obviously because of their womanhood and femininity. We won’t compliment men for being men or for being masculine. Women can do factory work; see China. I was commenting about the way the article was written.
/r/MensRights30/04/20 02:33 PM
22

Imagine if the team had been all women instead of all men. What would the articles be talking about?
/r/MensRights30/04/20 11:31 AM
-12

I don’t care. I get tired of this idea that we can just go ahead and build more bathrooms everywhere. It’s such a first-world response to a non-problem.
/r/MensRights10/01/20 09:51 PM
1

This just in: attractive people are attractive. More at eleven.
/r/MensRights23/11/19 03:40 PM
8

Okay? I don’t care.
/r/MensRights07/11/19 01:49 PM
16

We tie our property rights to our sexuality, which is inconvenient.
/r/MensRights07/11/19 01:08 PM
104

I’d honestly rather we just be less prudish. Sex is fun! Bulges are fun! Bikini wedgies are fun! Life is short.
/r/MensRights07/11/19 12:26 PM
3

Why are you getting up on a weird soapbox here? And work on your grammar.
/r/MensRights30/10/19 07:49 PM
1

You think Trump is smart and capable?
/r/MensRights30/10/19 07:39 PM
1

Who the fuck made up this whole, “structurally upheld” bullshit?
/r/MensRights16/05/19 09:49 PM
4

I’m going with always okay. Plenty of humans.
/r/MensRights16/05/19 05:48 PM
1

UFC
/r/MensRights13/05/19 10:50 AM
2

Supernatural brainwashing is specifically sticky.
/r/MensRights21/03/19 02:35 AM
8

Religion is the reasons politicians won’t touch it.
/r/MensRights20/03/19 10:39 PM
89

It was promoted in America by Kellogg to reduce the pleasure of sexual activity for religious reasons. Whether or not people have forgotten that’s the reason, that’s the reason.
/r/MensRights20/03/19 10:28 PM
117

Religion
/r/MensRights20/03/19 09:56 PM
1

True. You don’t “own” the cells you shed unless you claim ownership of them in a patent. This one guy with a rare blood marker did just that; contracted with a company to sell his own cells.
/r/MensRights11/02/19 06:48 PM
5

But enough talk! Have at you!
/r/MensRights17/01/19 04:59 PM
2

You don’t like big asses?
/r/MGTOW13/01/19 01:10 PM
2

Good for him?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 09:07 PM
2

Oh? Did oil become infinite because we didn’t happen to run out in 2005?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 09:04 PM
2

Some humans will be fine, for sure. Not 7.6 billion humans, but some humans. Some humans would also be fine if we lowered the birth rate to 1 and thereby lowered the human population to 3 billion. Then we could start having 2-3 again for a while. In the first scenario, billions of humans are going to be very not fine ALL AT ONCE in a few years. That’s not going to be fun.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 08:57 PM
2

The future of humans is already in crisis: 100%. After we run out of economical oil, we’ll only be able to feed around 3 billion humans. What do you think will happen to the other 4.6 billion? It would probably take some enforcement to stop people from breeding so much, for sure. Sometimes smart people have to make decisions for dumb people. But really I don’t think that will happen. I fully expect humanity to not do anything about this and for billions upon billions of people to die when it hit…
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 08:54 PM
2

Because humans shouldn’t prevent other humans from reproducing Why not? I’d say you shouldn’t prevent other humans from enjoying a healthy life and environment by having too many children yourself. That’s way more important to me. and reproduction is the point of life. There no “point” of life. That’s megalomaniacal or at least teleological thinking. We’re just here. We could make the best of it and thrive, or breed like wild animals and merely survive.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 08:50 PM
3

China pioneered the One Child Policy.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 06:04 PM
1

Why would we want that? Detonating nuclear weapons isn’t going to help the environment. We could just have fewer children. Asia should reduce their population too.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 05:55 PM
1

Of course we’re heading for a population cliff. We might be able to support 10 billion using fossil fuels to make fertilizer, but we will only be able to support 2-3 billion without the Haber Process. We can either take this ladder down the side of the cliff to three billion now, or fall off the cliff later. But that is not going to be a fun fall.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 04:19 PM
1

Rome didn’t fall because Romans had fewer children to slowly reduce the population to sustainable levels. In fact it was kind of the opposite. One reason for the fall was too many Goth refugees. I get that our CURRENT model is an ever-increasing population to keep things nice and young. That’s not a sustainable model. That’s a 400 pound person eating more and more every meal because it takes more and more calories to keep from feeling hungry. Time for a diet, and it’s a diet that’s probably goin…
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 04:07 PM
1

Now we know better. Why do there need to be 7.6 billion humans?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:54 PM
2

Why would it be the dark ages? We’d forget technology? Like if we had one child per woman for a few years to get down to three billion, we’d forget about computers? The world population was 0.5 billion through the dark ages. Then we discovered we could make fertilizer using fossil fuel as power.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:53 PM
2

To an extent. Meanwhile we’ve killed 60% of the wildlife since 1970 and counting. Why do there need to be 7.6 billion humans?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:29 PM
1

The conditions that sustain humanity are not natural and never have been. Since prehistory, human populations have used technologies and engineered ecosystems to sustain populations well beyond the capabilities of unaltered “natural” ecosystems. We’ve never before run out of the resource that allows us to sustain the overly-large population, not on this scale. Sometimes a river would dry up or flood and 90% of a village would die, but the situation with fossil fuel is unprecedented and global. W…
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:27 PM
1

That doesn’t solve the fertilizer problem. And seriously, this “farm up” thing is not currently happening except in a few, small instances. It’s not going to be able to feed everyone once the Haber Process runs dry. Why do we need 7.6 billion humans? Why not 3 billion? Is that not enough?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:16 PM
0

The American population is not decreasing, so it’s still not enough. And really it’s a global problem. The answer for environmental destruction because there are too many humans is for there to be fewer humans. The human population needs to get down to 3 billion before we run out of fertilizer. We use the Haber Process to make fertilizer. The Haber Process runs on fossil fuel. Fossil fuel is finite - therefore fertilizer is finite. We’re on borrowed time here.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:13 PM
3

That solves the space problem. That doesn’t solve the fertilizer problem. And I don’t think we’d build that infrastructure in time. Either way, why do there need to be 7.6 billion humans? Why not 3 billion? That’s still more humans than any human can even conceptualize.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 03:11 PM
1

Exactly! Peak oil means that the food supply will only be able to feed like 3 billion people (because of the end of the Haber Process). That’s going cold turkey. Dieting would be slowly reducing our population by having fewer children. Not zero children, just fewer. I mean what’s your solution to the environment?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 02:53 PM
3

We’ve killed 60% of all wildlife since 1970. It’s only getting worse. What’s your plan?
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 02:41 PM
5

That’s like saying a 400 pound person shouldn’t lose weight because being hungry is painful. We got ourselves into this mess. We can either get ourselves out with “dieting” our birthrates or just continue to let the environment collapse around us.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 02:40 PM
22

You know what’s ridiculous? 7.6 billion humans is ridiculous.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/11/18 01:04 PM
-12

I’m just saying it’s an odd fashion choice.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/11/18 03:55 PM
-11

To be fair, birth stones (especially pearls) are not for engagement rings. Buy zirconium if you don’t want to contribute to the diamond industry.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen25/11/18 02:51 PM
1

This is sort of a non-argument. Women can put that in their profile without limiting their dating pool. Very, very attractive men could probably put the other part in their dating profile without limiting their dating pool. Men and women are different.
/r/MensRights26/10/18 07:00 PM
1

What would be better if abortion were illegal again? What would be worse? Side-question: What do you think will happen to you after you die?
/r/MensRights31/08/18 02:22 PM
73

It couldn’t be that bad... Oh geez.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/08/18 01:25 PM
2

The unborn do not suffer by not existing. 7.6 billion is plenty. What would be better if abortion were illegal, besides your superstitious existential crisis about it? Call it “murder” if you want. I don’t care. I’ll even call it “murder” if that helps. Society would not be better without it.
/r/MensRights30/08/18 11:36 AM
1

Yes, a sign and counter sign. Like if I used a common American idiom, and the person couldn’t respond, that might be concerning. If they spoke English but didn’t use American grammar, that might work too. This wouldn’t have mattered in 2012. It matters in 2018. I don’t think everyone is a Russian. I don’t like how it’s come to thinking that either. I’m saying you should modify the way you type to make sure no one thinks that of you. This last message you’ve sent is in better English, though a ta…
/r/MensRights28/08/18 05:18 PM
0

Using careful grammar is respectful. I’m on mobile too so I always proofread. America is currently under some attack from foreign ideologues. If you want to make clear that’s not you, then you might have to take extra care. We’re sort of circling the wagons here. I’m reminded of how our soldiers in the Pacific during WWII would make people say “Lollapalooza” and would shoot them if they couldn’t.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 05:03 PM
1

You said, “Pretty much everyone,” which is more severe than “most.” It’s like 90% vs 51% if I had to quantify it. But I get you. The general user-base of reddit seems more against censorship than other platforms, despite what our admins may desire. That’s good. The far-left and far-right both love a good book burning.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 04:31 PM
1

I don’t. I even make the argument that social media companies now constitute the “town square” of the 21st century, and that there needs to be some protection against their censorship.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 04:21 PM
1

Clintonism isn’t “progressive.” It’s “triangulation” - an intentionally bad-faith attempt at liberalism meant to benefit campaign donors. Every Democrat should read “No one Left to Lie to” by Christopher Hitchens - explains “Clintonism” perfectly. And I hate that people call everyone who doesn’t agree with them on the internet a “Russian troll.” But for you, I might work on your English spelling and grammar so you can avoid that shutdown.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 04:17 PM
1

Truly bipartisan.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 04:16 PM
1

Someday what will do what?
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:34 PM
2

It’s a two-party system. If too many of us walk away, the conservative party gains power. Then they make abortion less legal than it currently is, which is the opposite of what I want. I also care about the environment, separation of church and state, and socialized medicine - I support most liberal ideals in general. I may be pro-gun and anti-censorship, but that’s not enough to make me want more Republicans in power.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:31 PM
2

No. I want abortion to be even more legal than it already is.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 03:20 PM
9

Didn’t even deliver a concession speech to that arena filled with her weeping fans. Ultimate low-point as a Democrat, for me.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 01:21 PM
7

I’ve seen the video. I think the driver was a huge piece of shit, but the jury should take into account what was happening in that video.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 01:20 PM
19

And we wonder why she lost.
/r/MensRights28/08/18 01:19 PM
1

Responding to the above person about this general phenomenon, not this one woman.
/r/MensRights27/06/18 05:35 PM
3

If a woman moved from Flint Michigan to Dallas Texas for a better job and life, then had her child WALK to meet her there, CPS might get involved.
/r/MensRights24/06/18 12:29 PM
1

Right, I’m wondering how many there would be if you added up ALL children separated from their parents.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 02:22 PM
2

I’m trying to come up with a word that would include huge, low BF% bodybuilders too. “Heavy” is good but not great.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:17 PM
15

It’s true - very true. Hell, divorced fathers are separated from their children every day.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:15 PM
10

WAAAAAAY more than that. How many fathers have been separated from their children in this country? It happens every day.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 12:15 PM
3

I know about that study - thought I’d seen one about trans people too. Not sure! I’d expect trans brains to be different from cis brains, as all differences in thought are chemical differences, and chemical differences can be measured by MRI. The interesting thing would be if they’re not just randomly different, but look more like the opposite sex.
/r/MensRights24/05/18 07:21 PM
6

Don’t trans brains look more similar to the other sex by MRI compared to cis people? I thought I read that. Though I wonder if that’s something inherent or if a cis man thinking “I’m a woman! I’m a woman!” really hard for a period of time would make their MRI look more like a cis woman’s.
/r/MensRights24/05/18 06:36 PM
31

The ref is supposed to grab someone in many combat sports. There’s a lot of adrenaline going on during a fight. Sometimes the winner needs someone grabbing them to remember to stop throwing punches.
/r/MGTOW01/04/18 03:05 PM
1

Jedi are literally magic.
/r/MGTOW01/04/18 03:02 PM
1

Didn't these start as satire?
/r/MensRights25/01/18 10:47 PM
1

Downvoting only for your whinging edit.
/r/MensRights25/01/18 10:38 PM
8

Oryx and Crake is something of a liberal dystopia in the way that Handmaid's Tale is a conservative one.
/r/MensRights15/01/18 02:31 PM
7

I know it's easy to get banned from r/TwoXChromosomes, but that's painting with a pretty broad brush. I wish women would arm themselves instead of just stewing in constant anxiety.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/08/17 10:29 PM
26

Or suggest that people check out r/CCW if they're in constant fear of being attacked.
/r/PussyPassDenied30/08/17 04:07 PM
1

When was the last time you saw an article like, "14 Things Every Fat Boy Absolutely Needs to Hear?"
/r/PussyPassDenied15/08/17 03:35 PM
0

"It’s appealing to imagine a world where artificial wombs grow babies, eliminating the health risk of pregnancy. But it’s important not to get ahead of the data, says Alan Flake, fetal surgeon at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and lead author of today’s study. 'It’s complete science fiction to think that you can take an embryo and get it through the early developmental process and put it on our machine without the mother being the critical element there,' he says."
/r/MensRights10/08/17 04:17 AM
-5

That artificial wombs in our lifetime is wishful thinking.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 11:45 PM
-1

Nuclear fusion reactors powering cities should be a thing. What's your point?
/r/MensRights09/08/17 09:54 PM
1

You couldn't drag me into that hipster shithole with an F-350 and a winch. How much do you weigh? I guess there's money in it... Then what's your confusion?
/r/MensRights07/08/17 06:52 PM
1

Correct - I can't think of any one word, void of corresponding physical action, that justifies violence. If you say, "Die!" while pointing a gun, that does justify violence. But that has a corresponding physical action. "I'm going to kill you" also justifies violence, but that's five words.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/17 05:46 PM
1

Wow - that happened a million years ago.
/r/PussyPassDenied05/05/17 05:11 PM
13

Most people don't question their media.
/r/PussyPassDenied03/05/17 05:32 PM
50

CNN
/r/PussyPassDenied03/05/17 02:31 PM
7

It's the whole, "If you're not paying (as much) for it, you're not the customer; you're the product." Men have no inherent value.
/r/MensRights18/04/17 05:18 PM
3

I would - 7.5 billion is too many as it is.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 04:22 PM
1

Now she has $675 million.
/r/MensRights12/04/17 04:17 PM
5

Mandatory IUDs placed upon fertility, illegal to remove without an application process. And Vasagel for men once that comes out.
/r/PussyPassDenied06/04/17 05:22 PM
1

It might be separate from his arguments, but it's not separate from his world view. We all see the world through the lens of our belief system.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/03/17 08:46 PM
4

Freedom of speech is super important, but it's more about the government not getting in your way. If your organization applauds someone for their actions, that organization condones those actions. It just made me think, "Yep, these people are just making a lot of noise with no positive message." I mean, a proponent of Sharia Law at a Woman's March? Really? What are you trying to accomplish?
/r/MensRights28/03/17 05:22 PM
4

For sure: but to give them the podium, let them make a speech, and then applaud their "bravery?"
/r/MensRights28/03/17 04:58 PM
11

Not super relevant. Though I did hear a lot of celebration that the Women's March was full of "Nasty Women." They appropriated that term from the right as a badge of honor. But some of those leaders really are "nasty." Accessories to murder/rape, Sharia Law proponents, corporate shills...
/r/MensRights28/03/17 04:43 PM
7

Yes
/r/PussyPassDenied18/01/17 03:50 PM
7

He left and came back to attack. "Provoke" doesn't mean "pissed you off a while ago" in this case.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/01/17 05:53 AM
31

No, you're a man. You're held to a higher legal standard.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/01/17 01:29 AM
-36

By being so indiscriminately violent in her presence. A jury would probably call that provocation. Imagine if she'd actually subdued him. She'd have a reasonable self-defense claim.
/r/PussyPassDenied18/01/17 01:13 AM
14

Kicking is instigating. She should have kicked harder or not at all.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/17 11:17 PM
13

The PP here is the idea that the P gives women a force-field. A man knows that if he kicks someone engaged in a melee, he is now a part of the melee.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/17 11:05 PM
16

You can't claim self-defense if you defend yourself while you're committing a crime, or if you provoked the attack. That's not just my opinion, those are two of the legal criteria.
/r/PussyPassDenied17/01/17 11:04 PM
2

That story also shows how "reasonable force" rules are bullshit. A single strike can permanently disable or kill you. I don't like the idea that I'm not supposed to shoot someone trying to punch me in some states. Fists are a deadly weapon. And an attack is not a boxing match; there shouldn't be rules for how the victim should respond.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/12/16 01:13 AM
1

I didn't say that, and I don't have kids.
/r/MensRights14/12/16 01:12 PM
0

No, I just think the line is blurry. Sending someone to jail eliminates their body autonomy too in my opinion. Forcing them to work a job they hate to make child support payments to avoid jail counts in my mind. For some reason, we have this thing where "body autonomy" has to mean blood. I think that's a weird distinction based more on squeamishness than morality. I can envision a future where overpopulation becomes such a problem that we start installing mandatory reversible birth control devic…
/r/MensRights13/12/16 10:19 PM
-1

It's clear from all these comments that this penis insecurity has really hit you. I'm sorry.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 04:34 PM
-1

You said previously that you're not into sex, and absolutist sex advice is usually incorrect.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 04:23 PM
-1

I'll take my advice from people into sex, thanks.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 04:13 PM
1

Wow, hopefully someone saved a copy.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 04:08 PM
-2

It honestly seems like an outdated concept.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 03:57 PM
2

Coconut oil is the shit.
/r/MensRights13/12/16 03:55 PM
1

There's a good kind of smegma now?
/r/MensRights13/12/16 03:53 PM
1

He didn't go through a sperm bank. You can't currently contract away child support. Sperm banks are the only exception right now.
/r/MensRights07/11/16 04:23 PM
3

I hope the fan theories are right and she turns out to be the Emperor's granddaughter. That would help explain how powerful she already is.
/r/MensRights26/10/16 05:37 PM
5

To be fair, the show evolves and all of the main characters are interesting and flawed.
/r/MensRights10/03/16 10:50 PM
1

Yep, it would probably be bad.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 05:29 PM
4

To be fair, this was a bad experiment. These contestants were chosen based on applications. The men who applied talked-up their survival abilities, while the women were trying to show that they were attractive. Does that invalidate the point? Yes, it does. That's what happens when you do a bad experiment. Try again with either randomly-selected, or 100% survivalist contestants.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 03:48 PM
3

Or a chemical smoke bomb, or it's actually steam, or a flock of birds that's too far away to resolve.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 05:28 PM
1

Alan Turing
/r/MensRights16/09/15 09:36 PM
4

I'd play the lottery every day if the odds were that good.
/r/TheRedPill27/02/14 01:37 AM
2

Well I guess... By then we sort of knew what we were doing and were total assholes about it. I'm talking about the transition from the life of the nomadic ape to that of the human villager (the kind of people who first kept dogs). What is "nature" selecting for here? Ability to use tools, living in huts, cooking food, hyper-intelligence... These are not "normal" traits. If village-life traits are selected for in any other species we certainly call that "artificial selection." Why not humans? In …
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 11:55 PM
2

in humans we haven't done artificial selective breeding Oh we so have. I won't claim to be a dog training expert, but I am a biologist. The word "artificial" here only means that the breeding is controlled by humans. And humans have the weirdest breeding preferences. Whether or not we're actively aware of it, we've been selectively breeding ourselves for as long as we've been breeding. We're not even just homo sapiens anymore; we're homo sapiens bred in captivity by humans. We have all the weird…
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 09:17 PM
4

if you treat a woman the way you'd like to be treated you'll get nowhere. Especially since you can't get anywhere at all if you never leave the bedroom.
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 08:09 PM
1

Very true. But humans have been domesticated for longer. We haven't changed as much as people would like to believe. That's why this sub exists. But I won't pretend to be an expert on dog training. I'm sure you've got more experience.
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 06:28 PM
3

I don't think his tactics are draconian, even as a human. But the point is that humans try to deal with dogs as they would humans. They get down on their level and use their words to communicate their wishes. What they need to do is to speak dog, which is being dominant (not aggressive or violent) and giving a light bite on the scruff of the neck. Humans would prefer not to be treated that way but for dogs anything else is abnormal and confusing. The Golden Rule has limited value in dog training…
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 04:29 PM
99

I was so sad when I heard that. I'm a big fan of The Dog Whisperer. It's like TRP of dog training. Humans and dogs are different. If you try to treat a dog in the way you'd like to be treated you'll get nowhere. The blue pillers in this case are people who still try and deal with their dogs as they would with unruly children... Someone's going to read this and think I think women are like dogs... Anyway, I hated hearing about how his whole "pack" broke up at once. His wife divorced him, destroyi…
/r/TheRedPill08/01/14 12:45 AM
2

We had this idea when we started with Social Security that made the whole thing work. The idea was that as technology advanced we would be able to decouple economic growth from resource consumption. If this idea were true, we could support an economy that depends on a continuously growing population. The idea didn't work. You can't decouple economic growth from resource consumption. Sure, technology can slow down the inevitable, but it's physically impossible to support the infinitely growing po…
/r/TheRedPill04/01/14 01:03 AM
0

I understand your position but still disagree. Not all of us can summon up perfect blue pill memories as examples and immediately analyze them through a red pill lens. Repetition is important. TRP will now only offer the carrot, when it used to also provide the stick.
/r/TheRedPill11/09/13 07:00 PM
4

The best part is the sea of blue pill comments being upvoted and red pill truth being downvoted by bitter people.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/13 09:59 PM
8

This is a huge mistake. It provides no guarantee that TRP won't be shut down. But mainly, it eliminates many users' (myself included) very favorite posts. Yes, links to blogs from manly, bodybuilding club owners is nice. But even more important for getting people unplugged are the blue pill examples. Seeing an obvious beta ask beg reddit for relationship advice and receiving the same useless shit I did growing up was eye-opening. I didn't realize how true TRP's analysis of women's motivations un…
/r/TheRedPill10/09/13 08:30 PM
1

He can't because of his medical condition.
/r/seduction05/10/12 08:25 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter